Part II -
Citizen: so smokeable heroin precludes contraction of HIV. So? In what way does that mean heroin use is not a health issue in any way? I KNOW alcohol is a health problem, which is why I referred to the hypocrisy of govt. collecting taxes from the sale of one set of harmful-in-excess drugs of dependence while enforcing criminal sanctions against users of others - try reading what I said. Your point however about govt. not caring about public health because they collect taxes ignores the fundamental fact that a massive proportion of our health budget goes toward funding treatment of alcohol and tobacco related illness. Governments know they cannot ban them so they do the next best thing - reduce consumption through a price signal (although admittedly demand is inelastic) and attempt to educate people about the danger of excessive (alcohol) or any (tobacco) use.

Hey Stickman,

Citizen's statements are (mostly) spot on as I wrote.

Clearly the prohibition and need to spend large amounts of money together with the dirty habits, sharing needles, are health problems. These are not necessary and could be eliminated if it was legal.

You seem to have a picture of heroin as it is displayed in the media, movies and the like. Yes there are desperate people out there who need to shoot up urgently etc. That is not the actual picture of drug users in general. It is a biased and deliberately nasty vision encouraged by wowsers to try and support their stupid prohibition laws. Given your general view on this issue I'm surprised you have swallowed this propaganda.

Most drug users, all drugs, are social users and you know that mate. As such they do not have that urgent need to shoot up multiple times a day.

I agree with Citzen too on pot. There is a difference too Stickman between pot and the stronger versions. The garden variety is not anywhere like the stronger, much favoured by drug sellers, variety. Some of the stuff they sell is not just marijuana either as you would also know.

The schizoid evidence you refer to is absent my friend. It's the same. Studies can be found to support any view of pot, and most other issues. Until there is concrete evidence either way I won't agree with rumour and innuendo. On anything.

I do disagree with Citizen's last statement re rich users. We are all prone to the nasty effects of any drug regardless of status.

I do point to ignorance where I see it Stickman and I hope you do too. Without anyone pointing we sink into the mire of gossip which is where our society currently sits. If I have to appoint myself, I will and do. I hope you feel strongly enough about your statements to do the same for yourself. If you don't then why write at all?

stickman: huh? Man boobs? Testosterone? What are you on about?

It's funny how often those arguing *against* the legalisation of drugs appear to be talking as if they're *on* a large amount of drugs..

People who use cannabis experience a feeling of well-being.
Wowsers don't like that.

Here’s the reality: By popular demand, drugs are here to stay, whether the powers that be like it or not. By outlawing drugs, the government has effectively reduced its capacity to deal with any problems caused by drugs

The problem is, by legalizing drugs, we may potentially create many new drug related problems. If we legalized drugs in the same way that alcohol is available legally, we would see increased rates of abuse, having negative effects on many people’s work ethics, family life, safety, etc. But why should the majority of drug users, who are hard-working, responsible people, be penalized by the actions of an irresponsible few?

To end the problems created in our society by the ridiculous war on drugs/freedom, without causing a societal breakdown caused by the legalization and subsequent mass abuse of drugs, we must find some middle ground. Drug use could be a privilege granted by the government, in much the same way as car licences are granted. Cars are convenient for many, but in the hands of a reckless driver, a car can be hazardous. We distinguish between those who have proved they are capable and responsible enough to drive by issuing them a licence - those that fail the test don’t receive a licence. Those that are licenced, and repeatedly breach their licence conditions, have their privileges suspended. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s certainly better than banning cars because they are potentially dangerous!

We could allow the (otherwise) law abiding majority of users the freedom to enjoy drugs, whilst preventing drug abusers from gaining access to substances that have a detrimental effect on themselves and society. To do this, we could introduce a drug licencing system that requires applicants to meet certain criteria, such as medical certificates, psychological tests, positive references from employers/coworkers, no history of violence, etc. Licencees would be reviewed, every so often, to ensure their drug use doesn’t have detrimental effects on them or society. Alcohol should also be included in this scheme. Violent, obnoxious drunks are clearly incapable of drinking responsibly, and should not be allowed near it!

gulliver: Well being is clarity of the mind and not some chemically induced stupor.

Many of you nice folks are hallucinating about the failure on the ‘war of drugs’ when only half-hearted measures are taken against offenders in this country. Apply the Cuban method and drug addiction will be greatly reduced.

The arguments put forward by Greg Barns have been largely debunked in an article by the US Department of Justice. ‘Drug Legalization: Myths and Misconceptions’

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/debate/myths/myths6.htm